Savannah Landing: What's next?

The Savannah River Landing is again on sound financial footing. The notion that the site will be a barren tract indefinitely no longer holds. The project will be developed.

Ideas and guesses about what will be built on the site have surfaced faster then a skin diver who has run out of air. Few seem to think the original plan – a mix of retail, office space and luxury housing – will be viable, at least on its own. Given the growing number of empty retail storefronts downtown and the difficult luxury real estate market (remember News Place?), they may be right.

The city is open to changes, so long as the developer sticks to the commitment to making the 54-acre site reflect historic downtown in architecture, landscaping and green space.

One immensely popular idea, and one that makes tremendous sense, is to put the proposed cruise ship terminal at Savannah River Landing. The riverwalk has been extended to front the Savannah River Landing property, and putting it there makes more sense than upriver near or beyond the Talmadge Bridge, as is being debated now.

One need only take a trip to smaller cruise ship terminals in this country, like Tampa, to see what that a cruise ship dock means development. Tampa’s port sits in the bayfront district, steps away from the city’s arena, and supports a busy retail center.

Savannah’s cruise ship terminal study is still in the beginning phases, with a task force examining the issue.

Other ideas sound familiar: ballpark or arena. The site was considered for a stadium long before the Savannah River Landing project was hatched, and the city taxpayers have already committed money to building a new arena/civic center.

Putting one or the other on the property seems far-fetched, however. First, the site is just 54 acres, and to put a ballpark or arena as well as parking on it would eat up most of the space. Parking could be arranged on an adjoining piece of property, say the tract across President Street or on the other side of the Truman Parkway, but that sounds like a nightmare.

Then there’s the public backlash.

Let’s take the stadium first – the city has put millions into upgrading Grayson Stadium in recent years, and there’s no real desire among the local populace to invest in minor league baseball. The Sand Gnats’ current ownership, Hardball Capital, has spearheaded a stadium/retail/residential project before in Fort Wayne, Ind. But doing so here, as part of an $800 million project at a time where lending is tight, is not realistic.

As for the arena, moving it to the Landing would enrage the westsiders. The city has picked a westside site (off Gwinnett Street) for the project and the arena is considered a cornerstone of the area’s revitalization plans.

Yet Savannah has yet to turn a shovel on the westside property. They are still reviewing bids for the environmental study and site prep. A sweetheart deal from Savannah River Landing should at least interest the city, particularly since their site already includes the entire infrastructure.

The question is, Does the developer want to give up such a large portion of the site? Like a cruise ship terminal, an arena would bring attract retail, particularly restaurants and hotels, to the property.

I’ve heard other ideas for the site, everything from a college or university making use of the property to a water park or small theme park. All sound good on first mention but have more holes than a golf course. (Who among us thinks SCAD, which has been so effective at taking undervalued, dilapidated buildings and turning them into classrooms and labs, would readily shell out top dollar to be a part of the project? And the water/theme park ideas have the same parking issues as the ballpark/arena).

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

To say that SRL is on "solid financial footing" and will be developed is a pretty big leap. What we know from your reporting is that the lender, a major Canadian Pension Fund, swapped their debt for equity, assumedly because the borrower stopped making payments.

We have no idea at this point how much MORE money (if any) this lender is willing to put into the project. Or how much capital was held in reserve and is available to push forward. All that occurred was a balance sheet restructuring and a new real estate advisor was put in charge. Not a bad thing, but let's not start dancing down the river walk.

As workouts go, they may see SRL as still having potential and want to invest more, or they may see it as a black hole and just took control to try and stop the bleeding. Fears assuaged a bit? Sure. Opportunity to do it different? Maybe. Out of the woods? No.

What we do know is that our city brain trust took a huge leap into SRL's economic morass when they let the bonds for the East Downtown TAD waxing delusional about how SRL tax increment was going to cover the debt service. Of course the city quickly learned the lessons of "free money," and is now tapping declining general fund revenues to cover repayment. Hopefully Michael Brown and J.B. Blackburn are already in discussions with PSP to set aside the mandates of the development agreement.

How magnanimous of the city that they are "open" to changes. However, with all the caveats you mention (making the 54-acre site reflect historic downtown in architecture, landscaping and green space) it doesn't really sound like they are that "open" to anything other than saving face. Plus the list is a bit ironic considering the city didn't hold themselves to a similar standard for the Ellis Square project. Sure let's listen to the people who installed a rainbow colored dancing fountain in the heart of the historic district. In all seriousness, we aren't going to dig our way out that sand pit with a spoon.

It is absolutely essential that we throw out the entire SRL Master Plan and start over with a clean sheet of paper casting a keen eye on new economic realities and what can reasonably be achieved. Like it or not, this property remains the lynch pin of the East Downtown Tax Allocation District. Savannah City Council chose to use TAD funds on populus projects rather than those that would serve as a catalyst for spurring development within the TAD. It's not too late to redirect our efforts and get it right this time. The money has only been allocated, not spent. The city council should issue an immediate freeze of all spending within the TAD until the issues surrounding SRL have been vetted and resolved. To do otherwise is in a word reckless.

So why not open our minds and rework this thing from the waterfront up, with no sacred cows. Land use needs to sync with achievable revenue generation and support of Savannah's largest industry - tourism. The time horizon must be shortened significantly as well, in that there is no one to shepherd this for the next 25 years.

Ideas regarding what might spring from this piece of land all warrant SERIOUS consideration. City leaders must remove their rose colored glasses and purge the pipe dream of ivy covered mansions, upscale condos, Class A Office anchored by designer stores and new squares. Broad public and professional input is demanded. When it's offered it needs to be managed, nurtured, heard and respected. It can't just be city council members throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks, or the Mayor saying no he won't agree to any changes or new thinking.

A forum needs to be created for citizen input as to what happens on this property. Just as we did with Project DeRenne, why not conduct a charrette for Savannah River Landing? Make sure the public's point of view is clear. This time we need to guide, not be led. The win-win outcome will not look the same as before. We should never lose sight of the fact that as an asset advisor, PSP, has a fiduciary responsibility to get as much of the money back as they can, as quickly as possible. They might say otherwise, but their sole obligation is to maximize the value of the Canadian Service Employee's Pension Fund. The interests of the citizenry of Savannah are not their concern.

We were starstruck once, with city leaders buying what Ambling was selling hook, line and sinker, rushing to create a TAD, bullying the school district and county into participating and obligating the city through a development agreement that received no public vetting. It's time to take the wraps off and act with total transparency. There won't be any fancy tented, catered parties or political photo ops to distract. This ground is clearly broken.

First and foremost, the waterfront should be designated as a retail and entertainment center. The goal should be to upgrade the experience from that of tourist trap to a quality, demand destination. The city should have rejected residential here the first go around. So with that said....

Performing Arts Center to accommodate the Savannah Orchestra and Chorus plus community theater groups. Let's make Savannah into the true Arts capital of Georgia. SCAD has shown us that it is possible to play on a big stage. Embrace it and make it work for us.

Anyone who participated in developing the first "plan" for that tract should immediately be disqualified from any future planning. Seriously any fool who thought putting upscale residential areas next to an industrial area and the sewage treatment plant that wafts a distinctive aroma over the area should never have any idea of theirs listened to again. Secondly anybody in city government who thought the first plan was a good idea should be banned from ever being allowed to make a decision again...any decision...ever.
As for ideas, I can say that a new retail center would probably be a bad idea. It will be mainly tourist oriented and there are already two competing areas in downtown, River Street and City Market (four, if you count Bay Street and Broughton Street as separate tourist areas) and adding an additional newer retail focal area gunning for the tourist dollars will be very bad news for those other areas.
The cruise terminal if it comes to fruition sounds like the best idea, with an educational complex being another possibility. The area is not ideal for residential development, we don't need another retail center (there's vacant stores a plenty in downtown), entertainment/ civic center is being developed on the westside, and theater space is covered with Lucas and Trustees.
Finally, fix the leak on President's Street that was created with all this (non) development. Twice a day without a rain cloud anywhere the middle lane floods or gets wet to some degree. Someone screwed up the engineering on that site and the tides are pushing water as far as Presidents Street once again. The whole spend beau coup dollars on fixing flooding on General Macintosh and then raise a huge plot of land up to drain back on to what you just fixed was epically stupid, but the Pres St situation didn't happen until they built the riverwalk. I think maybe all those old pilings they pulled out of the bank did more that hold the shore up

I think a red-light district would be a nice addition to savannah. it'd bring in tourists and service all of the sailors and those on cruise ships. Add a casino or two in there and now you've really got something that will generate a ton of tax dollars for the city. But, being prudish, puritanical southerners, they'll never go for it. Too bad. We could be a little Las Vegas on the East coast. And, the only one, at that. Legalize prostitution, gambling and full nude revues. Guaranteed money makers, even in a recession!

Savannah's downtown corridors are challenging for retailers. Company's like Trader Joe's (which I heard is looking in Charleston but, still focused on building Atlanta before they will jump to a smaller market), need more room. Even lower end retailers like dollar stores want minimum of 8000sf. The average space downtown is 1500-3000sf. Office space downtown is also challenged. Its the nature of progress trying to adapt in historic buildings- built on 90' deep lots laid out in the 1700's.

If done correctly, I believe it will not hurt shopping but complement it. We have MORE visitors that are MORE effluent than Charleston but, they have many more higher end shopping. We are missing an opportunity to attract people to stay longer & spend more as the economy comes back.

Savannah River Landing offers an incredible opportunity to tie in modern day efficiencies & plenty of parking with the historic district as a back drop. The challenge is attracting enough momentum to get the project off the ground. State & Local ECODEV groups should make it job one that it gets a look by anyone considering our area.

Housing can complement it. I agree we need to get to housing price points where young professionals can move downtown but that could be accomplished in the heart of the "old city"....which is 3 minutes away.

Rex Benton is a Savannah Commercial Real Estate Agent for Mopper-Stapen, Realtors & a contributing columist for Bis-Business in Savannah.